U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- Are teachers a bunch of gun nuts? Is this the root of a hidden conspiracy where school teachers are really the secret strength of the NRA? I doubt it. Fortunately we have real data so we don’t need to rely on my opinion. Facts show that a surprisingly large percentage of teachers want to carry a firearm at school. The fraction of teachers who want to go armed is several times higher than the average concealed carry rate across the US. That makes sense once we dig into it.

The conventional talking point is that teachers don’t like guns. Unionized teachers are broadly considered to be more liberal than the general populace. The president of the National Education Association said, “Bringing more guns into our schools does nothing to protect our students and educators from gun violence.” If guns are not the answer, then perhaps the teachers union president wants us to call animal control when a school is attacked. Most of us would call a good guy with a gun.

Union members are also reluctant to ask to do the work currently done by the members of another union. According to that meme, it is the job of the police to protect our kids at school, not armed teachers.

Unfortunately, it isn’t really the job of the police to protect us. Law enforcement gathers evidence for prosecution. Cops will arrest a suspect after they’ve built a case. The only time I can count on a cop to protect me is if I’ve hired an off duty police officer to work security for my private event.

A recent Gallup poll gives us some insights into what teachers think. The poll results are largely unsurprising. Most teachers don’t like guns. What is a surprise is that 18 percent of teachers would apply to take training and carry a firearm at work if their school district allowed it. 18 percent is certainly not a majority, but a majority of us don’t carry a concealed firearm in public either. On average, only 6 percent of adults have their concealed carry permits. That means teachers are about three times more eager than the average citizen to carry a firearm for personal protection.

That is both surprising and significant. I doubt we’d have attacks on our schools if 1 out of 6 teachers were armed. Who knew, and I wish the news reports had included that perspective when the poll numbers came out.

Teachers are about three times more eager than the average citizen to carry a firearm for personal protection.

The teacher’s desire to go armed makes sense when we think about it. In general, gun control becomes more popular after a mass murder. We all want to save lives, and our first impulse is to consider another law. Seeing the opposite effect among teachers seems counterintuitive.

The teachers perspective makes sense when we change our perspective. While most of us have a general interest in school safety, teachers have a particular interest. We both share our desire to protect students, but teachers will be on scene if a school is attacked. For teachers, school attacks are personal. Their response is personal as well.

..to which I say, “Thank you!” Every teacher I’ve talked to calls their students “my kids”. I love it that teachers want to protect “our kids”. I want teachers to save their own lives as well.

New York, NY-(Ammoland.com)-I am a Gun. I am not a person. I, myself, am incapable of harming anyone. Only a person is capable of harming another person. I cannot, myself, harm a person. And I cannot force a person to use me for an evil purpose. In the hands of a rational, competent, law-abiding person, I serve a greater good. In the hands of an irrational, incompetent, lawless individual, I serve a dark end. But, I, myself, must be held blameless because I am not a person.

Many ill-informed individuals are quick to cast aspersions on me. They will say or suggest that I am evil incarnate. I am not.I do not have the power of choice. I do not have “free will.” Only a human being has the power of choice; only a human being has free will. I do not. Only a human being can choose to do good or ill, in accordance with that person’s “will.” I cannot.Still, there are those who believe, falsely, that I am evil, and strenuously make that claim. That truly puzzles me; for, only a person who misuses me can be deemed evil.

Those who denigrate and demean me fail to realize the enormous benefit that I have brought and continue to bring to this Nation. The United States could not exist but for me. The founders of this free Republic used my great great grandfather, the flintlock, to forge a mighty Nation. During the Second World War, my cousins—including, among others, the M1 Garand Rifle,the Thompson submachine gun, and the Browning Automatic Rifle—in the competent hands of our Nation’s troops, helped to defeat two of our most powerful and intractable foes: Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan. I have also assisted and continue to assist our police officers in helping protect our communities from lawless elements.

And, I Am, To The Countless Average, Law-Abiding, Rational, Responsible American Citizens–As The Framers Of The United States Constitution Intended–The Most Effective Means Available Through Which These Citizens Are Able To Preserve And Defend Their Life, Safety, And Well-Being And The Life, Safety, And Well-Being Of Their Families—From Those Ruthless, Terrible, Evil Elements In Society Who Seek To Do Harm.

Going back far earlier in time, my ancestors, the matchlock and wheel lock firearms, gave to the common man the ability to grapple effectively with powerful nobility, who wore formidable suits of armor, wielding massive lances and swords, sitting atop powerful steeds.

There is much to commend me. Unfortunately, history’s revisionists dismiss me out-of-hand, selectively focusing only on those who have misused me. In recent months, young men who gained access to me, and who should never have gained access to me, have committed monstrous acts. Those monstrous acts have been wrongly ascribed principally to me, rather than to the individuals who have misused me. I am well aware of the horrific acts that deranged young people have done. Their monstrous acts should not have occurred and would not have occurred but for crucial missteps by irresponsible people who failed to properly secure me.

In 2012, a severely mentally unstable young man, (NOT TO BE NAMED), gained access to his mother’s firearms. Had I been able, I would have warned Nancy Lanza, the man’s mother, to properly secure me so that her mentally disturbed son could not gain access to me. She failed to do so. Her irresponsible act in failing to properly secure me led directly to her death at her son’s hands. This sad, deranged young man, (NOT TO BE NAMED), then carried me to a public school, Sandy Hook Elementary School, located in Newtown, Connecticut. In his hands, (NOT TO BE NAMED) used me to kill innocent children and teachers. But for Nancy Lanza’s irresponsible actions, this horrific incident would never have happened and could never have happened. Major media organizations wrongly blamed me for the tragedy.

A similar horrific event occurred, in February of 2018. Another deranged young man, by the initials NC (NOT TO BE NAMED), wrongfully gained access to me, and used me to murder or seriously injure many innocent students and teachers—this time at another public school, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, located in Parkland, Florida. Once again media people, reporting on this event, at the urging of those individuals who profess a pathological hatred toward me, blame me for the senseless tragedy, claiming that it is I, rather than this young man, (NOT TO BE NAMED), who is the principal cause of the tragedy.

Legislators, members of the mass media, and members of groups who call for my eradication, fail to realize that it is not I that cause violence. To cause violence I must have the desire to do violence, and once having the desire to do violence, I must then act on that desire. But, I am incapable of desire, and I am incapable of action. People, alone, are capable of desire and people alone are capable of acting on their desires. People are causal agents of harm. I am not a causal agent, but merely an object, a tool.Yet, I am blamed for the evil actions of those who misuse me. On careful reflection, though, it is clear that it is the killer, (NOT TO BE NAMED), 19 years old, and it is those agents of Government who knew or should have known of the danger (NOT TO BE NAMED) posed to the community, who are the principal causes for harm done to others. I, however, am held to account. I, the Gun,am deemed responsible for the myriad failings of people.

Irresponsible, lawless acts, uncorrected, tend to repeat themselves—an endless loop of tragedy occurring ever again. So it is that yet another severely disturbed young man, with the initials DP (NOT TO BE NAMED), went on a shooting rampage at a high school, in Santa Fe, Texas. That tragedy unfolded recently. How did this happen? Quite simply, the young man’s father failed to properly secure me. The father breached a duty of care owed to the community to prevent his son from gaining access to me. That failure led to horrific tragedy.

The pattern is disturbingly familiar, replaying itself over and over again, and each time, the tragedy was preventable, and would have been prevented but for the failure of adults residing in the community, and but for the failure of Governmental authorities to act to thwart the tragedy. And, once again, the blame for the tragedy is laid at my feet. I, who cannot do any act, good or ill, but for an agent who wields me, is ever the scapegoat.

Of course, the vast majority of gun owners are responsible. They treat me with respect. They handle me competently; and they properly secure me, preventing those who must not gain access to me, from doing so. Yet, there are individuals in Government, in industry, and even foreigners who bear a personal grudge against me and who hold me in contempt. And there are groups, comprising individuals whose sole purpose for existence is to eradicate me. These individuals think that by dispossessing millions of average, law-abiding, rational, responsible American citizens of me, the Gun, that violence will stop. It will not stop.

The drumbeat continues for my banishment from so-called “civilized” society. Those individuals who detest me argue that violence can be stemmed simply by outlawing me.

Still, the drumbeat continues for my banishment from so-called “civilized” society. Those individuals who detest me argue that violence can be stemmed simply by outlawing me. But, arbitrarily denying the average responsible citizen from owning and possessing me will do nothing to prevent lawless and deranged individuals from doing harm, whether by wielding me, or by wielding or utilizing another object. And, when all is said and done, I am just that—an object, a tool, nothing more. Those who seek to blame me, profane me, debase me, denigrate me, castigate me, would do well to recall a quotation from the classic 1953 Western film, “Shane,” where the protagonist offered this sage advice concerning me, as he addressed the wife of a rancher:

“A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it.”

Those who desire to ban me outright would do well to remember that banning me will do nothing to prevent the occurrence of and recurrence of evil acts.Evil cannot be legislated away, even as some people seem to believe that it can be legislated away or would like to believe that evil can be legislated away through the simplistic, implausible, unconscionable, and constitutionally impermissible, unlawful expedient of denying to the average, rational, responsible, law-abiding American citizen the fundamental right to own and possess me.At the end of the day, evil remains, and monstrous acts of violence will, unfortunately, continue to occur because evil exists in the heart of those people who seek to do evil, and there are, unhappily, all too many of those in the world. Evil does not and never did exist in me, “The Gun.”

About The Arbalest Quarrel:

Arbalest Group created `The Arbalest Quarrel’ website for a special purpose. That purpose is to educate the American public about recent Federal and State firearms control legislation. No other website, to our knowledge, provides as deep an analysis or as thorough an analysis. Arbalest Group offers this information free.

These hacks at the National Review are a bunch of RINO’S that would not know what Conservatism is if it bite them on the ass.

Why does this look like it could be filled with holes and hanging from a target retrieval system?

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “Gun-violence restraining orders (GVROs) make us all safer while empowering the individual and protecting liberty,” David French of National Review Online asserts in “A Gun-Control Measure Conservatives Should Consider.” That’s despite his admission later in the piece that “I don’t pretend that a GVRO is the solution to mass killings. There is no ‘solution.’”

Still, French insists — making the case that a piece of paper issued by a court actually offers protection against an obsessed sociopath with murder on his mind — “the GVRO is consistent with and recognizes both the inherent right of self-defense and the inherent right of due process. It is not collective punishment. It is precisely targeted.”

Uh…yeah. That’s why they’re called “individual rights.”

And to paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends upon what the meaning of the term “due process” is. Without the equivalent civil liberties protections of a jury trial with guilt established beyond a reasonable doubt, it is the suspension of a fundamental right not only without a conviction, but without a charge. As for GVRO effectiveness, anecdotal as well as limited study evidence suggests “The answer isn’t clear.”

OK, but what about separating hotheads from their guns? Won’t that at least help tilt the odds in favor of increased safety for “victims”?

So “conservatives” are now claiming “gun control” works and keeps determined criminals from obtaining firearms? Based on what? Your average weekend in Chicago?

But let’s give French the benefit of the doubt. Let’s assume all his due process assurances about ‘clear, convincing, admissible evidence that the respondent is a significant danger to himself or others” have been satisfied, and that “real evidence (e.g. sworn statements, screenshots of social-media posts, copies of journal entries) minimizes the chance of bad-faith claims.”

The anger management-challenged brute has been issued his orders and told to behave himself.

But why is he still free to move among us? We’re either serious about this or we’re not.

After all, we have “clear, convincing, admissible evidence” the “restrained” party is a danger. How is it responsible to allow a known danger access to the rest of us until such time as it can be established that he is no longer a threat?

Why wouldn’t such a threat be separated from peaceable society, after being afforded real “due process,” with all appropriate protections of course. And taking things out of the realm of gun bans and into the realm of civil liberties can’t hurt.

“Anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian” is a maxim I’ve been using for years because it’s true. Recalling that the three greatest mass murders in U.S. history were reportedly initiated with utility knives, fuel oil and fertilizer, and gasoline and a match, and how many homicides are committed with blunt or sharp objects or even with hands and feet, why would you want to give a “prohibited person” capable of using any of those the freedom to move at will among the rest of us?

Who thinks now is the time to be making concessions?

If proven violent persons are still truly dangerous, Robert J. Kukla made a brilliant observation in his 1973 classic “Gun Control,” equating their release from prison with opening the cage of a man-eating tiger and expecting a different result.

Gun owners are being besieged on all sides with a coordinated fury I’ve never seen before. Now is not the time for those defending the right to keep and bear arms to be ceding any ground, particularly since we know it will be relentlessly occupied and then used to launch the next incursion toward the goal of total citizen disarmament (with some expressing interest in going farther than that).

I guess it’s no surprise to see NRO offering a sop, as if that will satisfy those who’ve made it clear they want it all. National Review founder William F. Buckley didn’t really get the “shall not be infringed” thing either, on either prior restraints or on militia-suitable arms. And sorry, but David French’s is not a “conservative” voice I want representing gun owner interests if the extent of his judgment is to throw the circling pack of Democrat jackals a scrap of flesh. Nor is Ben Shapiro’s.

If the object is to protect Americans from those who wish to do them harm, the “solution” will never be in a piece of paper with a disarmament order. We each of us need to understand that the police have no legal duty to protect us. Unless we are capable of protecting ourselves and those we love, “gun-free victims” will be as inviting to attackers as “gun-free zones.”

With midterms coming up and raging “progressives” on the warpath, there doesn’t appear to be steeled political resolve from the GOP to enforce the right of the people to keep and bear arms throughout the Republic any time soon. Too bad, as that’s what’s really needed. But at the very least gun owner rights advocates should be pinning the ears back of any “conservatives” out there “helpfully” offering “reasonable concessions.”

They sure don’t speak for me.

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

Buckeye, AZ –-(Ammoland.com)- In what twisted universe is it “commonsense” to respond to an atrocity by passing laws that have not, will not, and cannot have any sort of significant impact on preventing or mitigating such atrocities?

Your elected representatives need to hear from you right now. They need to be reminded that none of the laws currently being proposed would have prevented the latest attack on school children – or any of the high-profile mass-murders of the past 30 years – and that enacting these laws in response to this emotional trauma will do nothing but hurt innocent, law-abiding gun owners, and reduce the politician’s chances of being reelected.

From a purely political perspective, many short-sighted Republicans had already been expecting a Democrat wave to slam Congress this year, based on low approval ratings for Congress and the president. That’s one of the main reasons we’ve seen so many of them announce their intention to retire after the current session. If it weren’t for the recently passed tax bill, they might be correct. Republicans have done a very poor job of following through on their campaign promises, and conservative voters have a well-earned reputation for turning their backs on politicians who don’t keep their promises.

If Republicans had just made a serious effort at doing what they said they would do, they could have forced the Democrats to block them – if they dared – and would have been able to leave that baggage on the Democrats’ doorstep. Instead, for the most part they just whined that it was no use to push things to a vote, because Democrats had the votes to block them, so why bother. What few feeble efforts they did make were often preempted by “maverick” Republicans undermining their own party, and shielding Democrats from the consequences of their intransigence.

But passage of the President’s tax bill offered Republicans a second chance. It buoyed them in the eyes of many of their base constituency, and once voters start noticing the extra money in their paychecks, should bring a whole bunch of swing voters into the Republican camp by November.

At least that was the thinking until the Florida attack happened, and Democrats and the media started beating their well-worn – and hollow – gun control drum, offering no effective solutions, but leveraging emotions to blame Republicans and “the NRA” (we’re all “the NRA” to them) for the atrocity, and calling for congressional action.

So now Republicans are tripping over themselves to again fall into the trap.

A major Republican donor in Florida put out a public statement insisting that no Republican would receive another check from him until they passed an “assault weapon” ban. That’s a pretty ridiculous move on his part, but even more ridiculous for Republicans to worry about. Even if this guy gives millions of dollars every cycle, money can’t compensate for actual votes, and offending millions of GunVoters in hopes of accessing a few campaign dollars is just stupid.

But at least one Florida congressman has leapt into the abyss, declaring that Americans are going to have to give up some of their liberty in the name of protecting children.

Weak-kneed Republicans are deluding themselves if they think that voting for gun control will protect children, or their own political careers. The reality is that coming out in support of gun control is almost certain to cost them their seats.

They will not be rewarded by their base for caving on the right to arms, nor will they be rewarded by the anti-rights crowd, which has a much broader agenda. While there are Republican voters who support gun control, few of them would vote for a Democrat over a Republican on that single issue. Likewise, Democrats and left-leaning independents are not going to abandon their other causes just because a Republican politician went along with their assault on gun rights.

This is just a political bludgeon being used to convince Republican politicians to cut their own political throats. There is no upside to a Republican supporting gun control, just as there is no benefit to society for enacting these laws.

Rather than fall into this political trap, Republican politicians need to be educated about the reality of the situation. Democrats don’t have any answers. We’ve tried their way and it has failed every time.

Connecticut had one of the nation’s strictest bans on “assault weapons” in place for over a decade before the attack on Sandy Hook Elementary.
Most mass-murderers passed “background checks” to obtain their weapons, most because they had no disqualifying record, and a couple because the system is faulty, and those that did not, generally stole them, not infrequently after killing the legal owner.

Mass-murderers almost always plan their attacks for months or years, picking their targets, analyzing potential obstacles, acquiring weapons, and exploring alternative means of wreaking destruction.

Republicans need to put this issue back into the laps of the Democrats. Rather than try to avoid a debate on gun control and mass-murder, Republicans should embrace that debate, and force the Democrats to justify their calls for restricting the rights of innocent Americans.

Democrats can’t do it, because gun control does not work – especially when it comes to rampage murderers.

We’ve tried it their way, and it failed. Now let’s try it our way. Lets stop disarming qualified teachers, coaches, and administrators willing to undergo extensive training and accept the responsibility of being prepared to stop an armed aggressor.

Jeff Knox

Call your representatives in Washington at 202-224-3121, to let them know you want them to stand fast against ill-conceived, ineffective, gun control laws. Post this article on their Facebook pages and on your Facebook page. Tweet it, share it, and repost it until these politicians understand that restricting our rights, based on nothing more than emotion, is not a solution, and will not be tolerated.

About Jeff Knox:

Jeff Knox is a second-generation political activist and director of The Firearms Coalition. His father Neal Knox led many of the early gun rights battles for your right to keep and bear arms. Read Neal Knox – The Gun Rights War.

The Firearms Coalition is a loose-knit coalition of individual Second Amendment activists, clubs and civil rights organizations. Founded by Neal Knox in 1984, the organization provides support to grassroots activists in the form of education, analysis of current issues, and with a historical perspective of the gun rights movement. The Firearms Coalition has offices in Buckeye, Arizona and Manassas, VA. Visit: www.FirearmsCoalition.org.

If the lame stream media will stop giving these Tide pod eating turds any coverage this would be better and maybe a less chance of a copycat.

BELLEVUE, WA –-(Ammoland.com)- When anti-gunners point fingers of blame for tragic school shootings, there is plenty of room for media sensationalism in that ugly spotlight, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

“Last week’s heartbreaking attack on students and faculty at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida is made even more terrible because the suspect is getting more than his share of fame,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb.

“His face has been all over television and newspaper front pages, and there is a concern that this kind of attention might inspire somebody else to seek this same kind of infamy.”

Gottlieb pointed to a project at Texas State University’s ALERRT (for Advance Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training) Center called “Don’t Name Them.” It recognizes the responsibility of the press to identify criminal suspects, using their names and likenesses to help in the apprehension, and to report criminal charges. However, beyond that, the “Don’t Name Them” effort encourages the press to instead focus on the victims.

“There are emerging details in this story that strongly suggest Broward County authorities and the FBI may have dropped the ball on the suspect in this shooting,” Gottlieb noted. “But the media will concentrate on stories about gun control, with demands to know how the suspect could legally acquire the gun he used.

“The ‘Don’t Name Them’ campaign might help by discouraging attention seekers from launching a copycat attack just to become famous,” he added. “There has been some research that indicates an increase in such events when an initial incident is sensationalized.

“So it appears,” Gottlieb concluded, “that the media may be partly to blame in all of this. That’s certainly not something I would be proud of. We certainly recognize the duty of the media to legitimately report the news, and the press must remain free to do its job. Maybe all we’re suggesting is that the media be as responsible with their First Amendment rights as they demand gun owners should be when exercising their Second Amendment rights.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

Anybody with an IQ greater than a box of rocks saw through people yammering for Commonsense Gun Safety Laws were actually wanting to repeal the Second Amendment.

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “No one is talking about taking away your guns,” say those who claim “all” they want is “commonsense gun safety laws.” Someone forgot to tell them that some publications have opinion pieces belying that.

“I’ve made it clear in the past that I want extreme measures in response to gun violence – such as repealing the Second Amendment to the Constitution,” Law Professor David S. Cohen writes in Rolling Stone. He has made that clear before, and wants others to join his crusade by “voicing these opinions.”

Plenty more examples exist to refute the reassurances that no wider disarmament goals exist. We’ve got examples from the past, from then Sen. Thomas Dodd, author of GCA ’68 saying “I would be for abolishing all guns … I hope some day the world will say ‘Destroy them all,’” to Nelson “Pete” Shields, founder of Handgun Control, Inc., admitting his strategy to ban guns is to do so incrementally.

Add present-day Nancy Pelosi admitting she hopes any new concessions on guns help accelerate more edicts down a “slippery slope” and Chris Murphy describing “bipartisan efforts” on “compromise” as “baby steps,” and it should be clear to all that the “concessions” all go one way and play into the hands of those who will not stop until they achieve complete citizen disarmament and an unchallengeable government “monopoly of violence.”

Actually, after that they’ll just be getting started. History is pretty clear on that.

Anyone who thinks concessions can be made and that will be the end of it is deluding both themselves (assuming they don’t know better) and anyone naïve enough to believe them. Every beachhead allowed or bit of ground voluntarily ceded allows those who want you disarmed to use it to launch their next incursion. To do so makes as much sense as throwing a scrap of flesh to a circling pack of jackals and expecting that it will satisfy them, and persuade them to leave you alone.

These are unsettling times for gun owners, as troubling as any I’ve ever seen. We need to remember that ultimately, we won’t lose our guns unless we as individuals make a choice to surrender them.

Now, in the midst of all the sound and fury, with all the demands being made and all the temptations for some who posture as our “gun rights leaders” to resort to “pragmatic” concessions, I’d like to introduce (or reintroduce) readers here to an essay written decades ago that I’ve always found inspiring.

I urge you to read, take to heart and share my friend and colleague Brian Puckett’s “Memorandum on Arms and Freedom” and recommit to its central tenet:

“We will not disarm.”

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

The FBI screws the pooch and DemocRats and the anti gun nitwits want to penalize honest gun owners.

BELLEVUE, WA – -(Ammoland.com)-The bombshell admission by the FBI that it was tipped about the suspect in last week’s tragic school shooting, and yet did nothing, provides damning evidence that it is the government that should be blamed, not American gun owners, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms said today.

“The FBI has admitted that it received a tip about the suspect’s disturbing behavior and comments on social media back in January, but didn’t follow up on the information,” noted CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “On top of that, the public has learned that police in Broward County had been called to the suspect’s residence more than 30 times over the past few years

“But who is being demonized as a result of the Parkland school shooting,” Gottlieb questioned. “That’s right, American gun owners.”

“Why should they be penalized and see their rights eroded because government agencies screwed up? The gun prohibition lobby has been prattling non-stop since Day One that the country needs to add more restrictions on gun rights.

“Why should gun owners give up their firearms freedom and sacrifice their personal security when the government can’t provide the security these gun grabbers promise with all of their cockeyed proposals,” he wondered.

“Even before all the students had been evacuated from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, gun prohibition lobbying groups including billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety and all of its satellite groups were clamoring for tougher gun laws,” Gottlieb noted. “They were all quick to blame gun ownership when the problem appears to be government incompetence, and this is not the first time it’s happened.

“The Texas church shooter’s criminal record should have prevented him from buying firearms,” Gottlieb said, “but the records weren’t forwarded by the military to the National Instant Check System. This wasn’t the fault of gun owners, but the government. And now anti-gunners want us to surrender our rights?

“Ronald Reagan was right,” Gottlieb concluded. “Government isn’t the solution to the problem. Government is the problem.”

With more than 650,000 members and supporters nationwide, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (www.ccrkba.org) is one of the nation’s premier gun rights organizations. As a non-profit organization, the Citizens Committee is dedicated to preserving firearms freedoms through active lobbying of elected officials and facilitating grass-roots organization of gun rights activists in local communities throughout the United States.

Like this:

U.S. Senator Chris Murphy does not have any shame as he is a DemocRat Ghoul that gets off on dancing on the bodies of murder victims.

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- The Democrats were quick to pounce with their favorite adage that has served them well: “never let a good crisis go to waste.” U.S. Senator Chris Murphy-D-CT, without any facts in hand, was the first in line to politicize and weaponize the Florida school tragedy.

“Only in America!”, he said.

Murphy seems to have conveniently forgotten the 80 youngsters gunned down at a camp in Norway. Guns are banned in Norway. How about the shooter who killed 7 school children in France? Guns are banned in France. Cops don’t even carry guns.

15 school children shot in Germany. Guns banned there. 16 school children slaughtered in Scotland. Onerous gun control there. Then there is the kid who shot up the school cafeteria in Italy. 132 school children shot in Pakistan. Only the military are permitted guns. Not to mention the thousands of school age children murdered and used for target practice in other Muslim countries.

All of the above countries represent a combined geographic area smaller than America. Sadly school children are slaughtered all over the planet by gunfire. Not “only in America.”

Other than beating the drums for gun control, Murphy’s only claim to fame was not paying his rent or mortgage. He “forgot” to pay.

What did Murphy and his sidekick Fake Vietnam Vet U.S. Sen Richard Blumenthal D-CT offer to help prevent another Sandy Hook? Nothing more than rhetoric. Yet the Connecticut voters keep re-electing them.

I was there to personally experience the aftermath of the Newtown carnage. It was more than a “learning moment”.

What learning did Murphy share with other school districts around the country? Nothing other than a failed legislative attempt at ill conceived background checks….which is redundant in most states….including Florida. What prayers or words of comfort did Murphy and his ilk offer to the Parkland parents and families?

Like this:

I am a proud Flag Waving Patriot and if anyone has a problem with that I say tough.

I lost an uncle in World War II, Uncle Frank and his comrades fought to keep America free so I feel like I owe it to him and all of the men and women that have died in war to honor America as that honors them.

I promise you this much if I see you stomping on Old Glory you will be in for an ass whooping.

I do not understand why DemocRats call themselves DemocRatic because the are not democratic.

U.S.A. –-(Ammoland.com)- Did you ever think you’d see the day when a prominent political party would accuse the president of being divisive and exclusionary for saying “America” too many times during his State of the Union speech?

The American Civil Liberties Union made that very complaint. No, the ACLU is not the Democratic Party, but their positions on such matters are virtually indistinguishable. Besides, many prominent Democrats and media liberals made similar objections after the speech.

MSNBC host Joy Reid brazenly trashed traditional American values and institutions with her tweet accusing President Trump of trying to force the normalization of himself by using “terms of the bygone era his supporters are nostalgic for” — namely, church, family, police, military and the national anthem.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called Trump’s unapologetically pro-America speech, which was widely approved by the American people in flash polls immediately afterward, “dangerous.”

Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., who recently compared Trump’s presidency to a time “right after the 1932 elections when Adolf Hitler was elected chancellor,” took umbrage at Trump’s statement that Americans, like the immigrants whose parents brought them here illegally as children, “are dreamers, too.”

Fox News analyst Juan Williams was deeply disappointed by the speech, saying that this was an opportunity for Trump to reach across the aisle and bring us together but he didn’t take it. More bizarrely, Williams said in response to Trump’s statement that “Americans are dreamers, too,” “David Duke and the KKK would love that.” Seriously?

Obviously, today’s Democratic Party (at least its leadership) has a problem with raw expressions of patriotism, because Democrats can’t seem to look at America through anything but their distorted prism of Balkanized identity politics.

They assume that when Republicans promote church, family, police, the military, the national anthem and wholesomeness and goodness, they are somehow dog whistling to white supremacists, or some such nonsense. Democrats said Trump delivered a “wedge speech,” one that “inflames the cultural divide.”

Perhaps their habit of divining code language in our every pronouncement is simple projection. For all of Trump’s faults, he pretty much says what he believes. His SOTU speech was no exception. Probably the most consistent message he delivered on the campaign trail was his belief in an America-first philosophy — not certain groups in America at the exclusion of others but all Americans.

What these kvetching liberals can’t grasp is that we conservatives don’t view our heartfelt expressions of patriotism as exclusionary or divisive. Indeed, by definition they are not.

Liberals say we promote white privilege. We don’t. They say our policies disfavor minorities, but they don’t; they are race-neutral and aimed at lifting up all people. They say immigration enforcement advocates are driven by nativism and bigotry. We aren’t; we are animated by a love for America and the American idea, which is enshrined in our founding documents. We don’t believe that America is the greatest nation in history by accident, and certainly not because of ethnic demographics.

Rep. Joseph Kennedy, in the official Democratic response to the SOTU, audaciously quoted a U.S. motto, “e pluribus unum,” meaning “out of many, one” — though every other thing out of his mouth and that of his Democratic colleagues undermines that precept. Conservatives, though, actually believe in a melting pot and equality of opportunity and equal justice for all.

Sadly, Kennedy and his Democratic leaders view America only through race-conscious eyes. They are the ones who deliberately divide us, by constantly agitating over race, gender, sex, religion and any other category that will incite their base into a frenzy.

America was mired in a perpetual malaise under Barack Obama, and the Democrats’ goal, when Obama’s scapegoating of George W. Bush had finally extended even beyond the Democrats’ willing suspension of disbelief, was to delude Americans into accepting economic stagnation as inevitable and the new normal.

Already, in one short year, with Trump’s tax cuts, his deregulation, his business-friendly policies, his recommitment to America’s domestic energy industries, and his overall contagious optimism and bullishness on America, this nation is roaring back, and Democrats are conspicuously vexed about it.

They have no viable alternative agenda; everything they tried under Obama failed. Yet they’re still promoting the same destructive ideas. That is why they have reduced themselves to ad hominem Trump slanders, bogus charges of collusion with Russia and blanket smears of conservatives as bigoted extremists.

Democrats are the ones who have become more extreme every year. Yesteryear’s liberal extremism is far too conservative for today’s Democratic Party. With Democrats’ constant westward shifting of the goal posts, they regard mainstream conservatism as radical. Proof of their extremism and intellectual bankruptcy is their maniacal rhetoric, such as accusing Trump of being a dangerous dictator.

Their emotional breakdown over innocuous and uplifting presidential expressions of patriotism and traditional American values — with their perception that such inherently unifying ideas are divisive and exclusionary — screams volumes.

Such utterances of national pride cannot credibly be depicted as divisive. Likewise, Democrats’ quest to force-fit identity-tinted lenses on all Americans so that we can see one another only as members of certain groups cannot be spun as uniting or constructive.

It would be refreshing if Democrats could at least be truthful about where they stand, but as of now, they are saying one thing and at the same time, well, saying another. Please keep it up through November, guys.

The armed robber Michael Grace Jr would have possibly killed his former coworkers if he had not been shot first.

I get the feeling that the person that shot this thug was white and that is why his mother is raising so much of a stink about him being shot in the head.

USA –-(Ammoland.com)-“Why in the hell did this guy [pizza employee] have a gun?”

That’s the question Temia Hairston is asking in the aftermath of her son, Michael Grace, Jr., being shot and killed while trying to rob a North Carolina Pizza Hut restaurant with his own gun.

While we weren’t there, we think we can answer the question pretty definitively for Ms. Hairston; that Pizza Hut employee was carrying a firearm because of people like her son.

Police said Grace Jr. was armed and he along with two other people tried to rob a Pizza Hut in the 3200 block of Freedom Drive. During the incident, an employee fired his own handgun and killed Grace Jr. …

The parents are angry that their son was shot and killed by an employee. They don’t believe the full story has been released to the public.
Apparently Ms. Hairston believes there’s some kind of conspiracy surrounding the fact that a Pizza Hut employee chose to carry a concealed gun while working in a retail operation that’s open late into the night. She can’t fathom why someone who’s working for a living would violate his employer’s policy by packing while on the job.

Hairston thinks there was something more going here. Her son had worked at that particular Pizza Hut in the past and was no doubt a model employee.

She said her son was shot in the head, and she thinks the shooting may have even been personal, citing past conflicts Grace Jr. had had with other employees at the restaurant.

“This wasn’t a body shot. This was a head shot. My son was shot in the left side of his head just behind his ear. A head shot is personal,” said Hairston.

Besides, no one has the right to use deadly force to defend himself and other innocents during the commission of a crime. We can’t have people shooting armed robbers who threaten them. Only police officers should have that right.

“If there was to be a death, it was not the place of the employee at Pizza Hut. That is the place of law enforcement,” said Hairston.

Because as we all know, police are always able to be at the scene of every crime, right when they’re needed most.

So while Ms. Hairston doesn’t condone what her son did, she says the employee who defended himself and his co-workers’ lives needs to be held to account for his actions.

Hairston said she thinks the employee who shot her son needs to be in jail, and wants all parties involved in the situation to be honest about what happened.

We couldn’t agree more. A little honesty about the death of her son would be a breath of fresh air at this point.